|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|21-518||2nd Cir.||TBD||TBD||TBD||TBD||OT 2021|
Issue: Whether an ad hoc arbitration to resolve a commercial dispute between two parties is a “foreign or international tribunal” under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) when the arbitral panel does not exercise any governmental or quasi-governmental authority.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Oct 05 2021||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 8, 2021)|
|Nov 05 2021||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, Inc.|
|Nov 08 2021||Waiver of the 14-day waiting period under 15.5 filed.|
|Nov 08 2021||Brief of respondent The Fund for Protection of Investors' Rights in Foreign States in opposition filed.|
|Nov 15 2021||Reply of petitioners AlixPartners, LLP, et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 16 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/3/2021.|
|Dec 06 2021||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/10/2021.|
|Dec 10 2021||Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, Inc. GRANTED.|
|Dec 10 2021||Petition GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment in No. 21-401 is granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.|
|Dec 10 2021||Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 21-401. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 21-401. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”|
|Jan 26 2022||Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.|
|Jan 27 2022||The record received from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit has been electronically filed.|
|Jan 28 2022||ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, March 23, 2022. VIDED.|
|Feb 11 2022||CIRCULATED|
|Mar 23 2022||Argued. For petitioners in 21-401: Roman Martinez, Washington, D. C. For petitioners in 21-518: Joseph T. Baio, New York, N. Y. For United States, as amicus curiae, supporting petitioners: Edwin S. Kneedler, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent in 21-401: Andrew R. Davies, New York, N. Y. For respondent in 21-518: Alexander A. Yanos, New York, N. Y. VIDED.|
We can announce, however, that we'll be liveblogging the release of orders from today's conference AND opinions, starting at around 9:25 @SCOTUSblog. Please join us to discuss the leak, pending opinions, and whatever other SCOTUS-related issues are on your mind. https://twitter.com/AHoweBlogger/status/1524788054434660353
#SCOTUS will release opinions from argued cases at 10 am on Monday. The Court does not announce in advance how many opinions it will release or which ones.
NEW: Next Monday will be a Supreme Court opinion day. Starting at 10 a.m. EDT, the court expects to issue one or more decisions in argued cases from the current term.
Just in: The Supreme Court denies a request to block the execution of Clarence Dixon, an Arizona man who is scheduled to be put to death today. Dixon's attorneys argued that, because of a mental illness, Dixon is not mentally fit to be executed under the Eighth Amendment.
On this date in “How Appealing” history: At this very moment twenty years ago, this blog came into existence, boosting your humble author from nearly total obscurity to perhaps a modicum less than nearly total obscurity.
On this happy occasion, I once https://howappealing.abovethelaw.com/2022/05/06/#179553
How the unprecedented Supreme Court leak may have been a response to an earlier disclosure about the justices' private deliberations. @TomGoldsteinSB on what it all means for the court and its secrets.
How the leak might have happened - SCOTUSblog
Among the debates generated by the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion in Dobbs is whether the leaker was...
JUST IN: The Supreme Court confirms the authenticity of the draft opinion revealed last night by Politico. The chief justice has ordered an investigation into the leak.